Q. Rogue/Fighter Nudity?

[SSS-Druid]

Frankly, I am of two minds when it comes to images like those mentioned above.

If the image is arbitrary and has, frankly, nothing to do with the text, I have little use for it.

There is, however, a place for it, I do believe.

Someone above mentioned our DM Screen. The culture that the image represents - like many Earth cultures, folks - does not require that its women cover their breasts. It is, honestly, as simple as that.

So, yes, while I have no need for the depiction of partial (or even hinted) nudity for the sake of simple tittilation (*rimshot*), I also have no use for those neo-Victorians who would look down on a culture that doesn't hold their own standards as something decadent or perverted.

And as for the "They won't take us seriously!" excuse, I've never encountered someone who had that reaction. And if I did, my retort would be simple:

"So, because Cinemax shows T&A, all television is inherently useless? And it is easy to understand why someone reads 'Wired' just because 'Playboy' is full of skin. An interesting proposition - what a strange and limited world you must live in."

(Caveat: I'm a gay man. That may be why no one has ever questioned me on that aspect - they certainly aren't going to suspect that I purchased the book to view breasts, that's for damned sure.)

 

[Talaysen]

Hmmm...I would like to point out that I did see the image of the wood elf in the DM Screen Companion as perfectly natural; I'm vaguely familiar with Earth cultures that followed similar practices, or were rumored to, and am in fact descended from one or two of them. No objections there - I was merely trying to point out that Mongoose Publishing did not have a monopoly on topless women, and (simultaneously) that topless women were not necessarily something to freak out over.

Anyway, I mainly object to significant nudity (and this covers chainmail bikinis, clothing reduced to small barely-concealing rags, etc. - i.e. cheesecake in all its many forms - as well as actual nudity in the strictest sense) when it's on a product's cover - I don't like explaining that sort of thing to family and friends. On the other hand, I do find cheesecake within a product's pages to be somewhat...distracting, hence the "not entirely pleased" bit in reference to Quintessential Rogue.

 

[mythusmage]

Dangerous way to think amigo.(snip)

Mr. Kushner, that was stupid. How the hell does the human body equate to child abuse? What sort of person would equate them?

Frankly, I find your antipathy towards the human form repugnant at the least, and disquieting at the worst. Then add in your abhorent cynicism and I can only conclude you are not a person I'd care to see in one of my games.

So the ladies are (damn near) nude. So what? If it upsets your virginal sensibilities so much, don't buy the damn book. I happen to think that ladies are (by and large) neat people. I also happen to think most women look good. I'm heterosexual, sue me. I am firmly convinced that women should be treated as people, not as objectified. If a women wants to pose (nearly) nude for a fantasy illustration, that's her business and none of yours.

Don't try to run my life. I'm old enough to handle my own affairs. Above all, never lump me in with a bunch of sociopathic fools who can't handle a relationship with a man.

Alan Kellogg

 

[JoeGKushner]

Alright Alan, on a point by point basis...


Mr. Kushner, that was stupid. How the hell does the human body equate to child abuse? What sort of person would equate them?

I wasn't equating the human body with child abuse. I was equating the acceptance of nudity in a role playing game with the acceptance that some things are more acceptable than others until the point comes where everyone states that everything is okay.

Frankly, I find your antipathy towards the human form repugnant at the least, and disquieting at the worst. Then add in your abhorent cynicism and I can only conclude you are not a person I'd care to see in one of my games.

So you're saying, based on the fact that I don't want t&a in my rpg books that I have antipathy towards the human form? Uh... okay.

So the ladies are (damn near) nude. So what? If it upsets your virginal sensibilities so much, don't buy the damn book. I happen to think that ladies are (by and large) neat people. I also happen to think most women look good. I'm heterosexual, sue me. I am firmly convinced that women should be treated as people, not as objectified. If a women wants to pose (nearly) nude for a fantasy illustration, that's her business and none of yours.

Once again, nothing to do with virginal sensibilities. I just feel that it's the sign of a weak artists, and a weak company to rely on t&a. And happening to think that the ladies are by and large neat people is based on what context? These aren't full figured paintings or anyting so it's doubtful he needed models for it. And you're right, it is her business that she poses, but since it winds up in a product I purchase, I have the right to make my opinion of it known. At least, here in America we do.


Don't try to run my life. I'm old enough to handle my own affairs. Above all, never lump me in with a bunch of sociopathic fools who can't handle a relationship with a man.

I'm not trying to run your life. And I'm not lumping you in. I'm stating that acceptance of something based on the fact that "if you saw more of it" if a very dangerous theory. Hell, I live in Chicago, number one murder capital of America. Should I be used to murder? Don't think so.

Please refer all personal attacks to joegk@rcnchicago.com.

I do not want to start a flame war so please keep such things, when they must be said, off on a private line eh?

 

[Darke]

Europe

I'm happy that I live in Europe - over here we see the "nudity"-thing a lot easier.

Just one thing to add:

Quote:

"I just feel that it's the sign of a weak artists, and a weak company to rely on t&a."

->A bad product will not become good and a good product will not become bad if you add some pictures of nude people to it.<-

Either you like it or not - but it doesn't change the product from good to bad or the other way around.

Enjoy your life - you'll never know when it ends.

das Darke

 

[Crothian]

Re: Europe

I'm happy that I live in Europe - over here we see the "nudity"-thing a lot easier.

I think this is a good point. THe rest of the world has less a problem with it then us "Purtian Americians". It's just the human body. It's not being displayed in a sexy way. Simple art protected by the Bill of Rights. Not that I want to start a debate on that, but I really thing that this is being blown way out of proportion.

 

[Matthias]

Our system of supply and demand is self-correcting. Popular books bring more sales and objectionable and offensive books will not sell as well (overall). Companies have to cater to their markets' demands and proclivities.

Objectionable material will make less money.

No one can force you to buy something you don't want.

If a piece of artwork in a book that's otherwise stellar bothers you, get a suitable writing utensil and color over the parts of it that bother you. It seems silly to reject a book because of a couple pieces of borderline-nude art.

On the flipside, it also seems silly to get all defensive when someone else objects to a piece of art that you have no issue with. It's not like they can walk into your house and confiscate your gaming material. No matter what happens to the company or the publication in the future, you still have your copy, so what's the big deal?

Let's say Mongoose announced tomorrow that they will put out a book of fantasy-themed hard-core porn drawn by many famous artists in the gaming industry. You decide that you are going to get yourself a copy ASAP, but community reception of this project announcement is so lackluster or negative that they decide to cancel it.

Even though you might be disappointed You would have no reason to be indignant toward the company or the rest of their customers, because that's the nature of capitalism. Fringe interests get shafted, but so what? The mainstream gets what it wants. If you are a fringe interest, there's nothing stopping you from catering to your fellow fringers, and to be sure there will be companies looking for an untapped niche, but overall you have no right to object to what other people find offensive (or don't find offensive). It works both ways.

Sorry for the rant, but I'm bored ATM.

 

[RangerWickett]

Let's say Mongoose announced tomorrow that they will put out a book of fantasy-themed hard-core porn drawn by many famous artists in the gaming industry.

Let's not. I'd be afraid to even consider what would be released as Open Gaming Content. ;-)

[rest of comments edited because of a bad tone]

 

[Psychotic Dreamer]

I have not looked at the book yet and I am not sure I will get a chance to.

Just because they are showing female breasts it does not seem to me that they are saying that Women = Sex. If they were saying Women = Sex I would imagine it would be a completly naked woman in a sexual explisit position.

Just my thoughts on the subject.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I have not looked at the book yet and I am not sure I will get a chance to.

Just because they are showing female breasts it does not seem to me that they are saying that Women = Sex. If they were saying Women = Sex I would imagine it would be a completly naked woman in a sexual explisit position.

Just my thoughts on the subject.

Gotta disagree with ya here. They are saying Woemn=Sex because these aren't normal looking women, but rather, hail from the old Image days where women had that impossible curvature to the figure. Same goes true for the men in terms of muscle build mind you.

If they showed some normal looking women, or even fat women, or a variety of body styles, it'd be different. It just seems that this artists has a talent for one type of female form. Doesn't stop the game material from being top notch, just my respect for the artists and the publisher.